Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Center

23 Citing cases

  1. Biggs v. Wyatt

    2015 Ill. App. 5th 140141 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015)

    A claim for loss of consortium is a separate cause of action, even though it depends upon the claim of the impaired spouse for her injuries. Pease v. Ace Hardware Center of Round Lake No. 252c, 147 Ill. App. 3d 546, 555 (1986). Loss of consortium includes both the loss of the impaired spouse's

  2. Casey v. Pohlman

    198 Ill. App. 3d 503 (Ill. App. Ct. 1990)   Cited 9 times
    In Casey, the jury found in favor of Mr. and Mrs. Casey, but awarded damages only to Mr. Casey; no damages were awarded to Mrs. Casey for her loss of consortium claim.

    (118 Ill. App.3d at 858, 455 N.E.2d at 837.) Loss of consortium incorporates two basic elements of the marital relationship: (1) loss of support, and (2) loss of society, which includes companionship and sexual intercourse. Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Center (1986), 147 Ill. App.3d 546, 555, 498 N.E.2d 343, 350. In the instant case, the evidence was clear that Mr. Casey had been an active 70-year-old retiree prior to the accident, but because of injuries caused by the accident is unable to perform farming duties around his farm, is unable to play as actively with his grandchildren, and is unable to ride horses.

  3. Seaman v. Wallace

    561 N.E.2d 1324 (Ill. App. Ct. 1990)   Cited 6 times

    This is not necessarily true. The claim for consortium is a separate cause of action based upon the impaired spouse's claim for his own injury. ( Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Center of Round Lake No. 252c (1986), 147 Ill. App.3d 546, 498 N.E.2d 343.) To recover on a consortium claim, a party must prove liability on the part of defendant, marriage to the injured spouse, and damages. ( Pease, 147 Ill. App.3d at 556-57, 498 N.E.2d at 350.

  4. Sims v. United States

    20 CV 03993 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 31, 2023)

    Mrs. Sims's loss of consortium claim is a separate and distinct cause of action under Illinois law, and her damages are assessed independently. See Baker v. City of Chicago, 483 F.Supp.3d 543, 561 (N.D. Ill. 2020); Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Ctr. of Round Lake No. 252c, 498 N.E.2d 343, 349 (Ill.App.Ct. 1986). The Court finds it somewhat implausible that Mrs. Sims would be independently claiming the exact same amount in damages as Mr. Sims for his injuries, given the disparate descriptions of the injuries and the fact that damages are assessed separately.

  5. Baker v. City of Chicago

    483 F. Supp. 3d 543 (N.D. Ill. 2020)   Cited 18 times

    Under Illinois law, when one spouse is injured, the other may recover from the tortfeasor in a separate cause of action for the resulting loss of support, society, and companionship. SeePease v. Ace Hardware Home Ctr. of Round Lake No. 252c , 147 Ill.App.3d 546, 101 Ill.Dec. 161, 498 N.E.2d 343, 349 (1986) (setting out the elements of a loss of consortium claim). Defendants here do not present any argument for dismissal directed toward the substance of Plaintiffs’ loss of consortium claims.

  6. Koh v. Graf

    307 F. Supp. 3d 827 (N.D. Ill. 2018)   Cited 5 times

    Under Illinois law, when one spouse is tortiously injured, the other spouse may recover from the tortfeasor for the resulting loss of support, society, and companionship. Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Ctr. of Round Lake No. 252c , 147 Ill.App.3d 546, 101 Ill.Dec. 161, 498 N.E.2d 343, 349 (1986). At this point, Mr. Koh's state-law tort claim for malicious prosecution has been dismissed, and all that remains are his constitutional claims.

  7. Stallings v. Black Decker Corporation

    Case No. 06-cv-4078-JPG (S.D. Ill. Oct. 7, 2008)   Cited 2 times
    Recognizing that evidence "of riving knives on European portable circular saws and on American portable circular saws in the 1970s ... may demonstrate the addition of a riving knife is technologically feasible"

    Because products liability actions often involve specialized knowledge or expertise outside the layperson's knowledge, they generally require expert testimony to establish a design defect. Baltus v. Weaver Div. of Kidde Co., 557 N.E.2d 580, 588-89 (Ill.App.Ct. 1990) (citing Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Ctr., 498 N.E.2d 343 (Ill.App.Ct. 1986); Sutkowski v. Universal Marion Corp., 281 N.E.2d 749 (Ill.App.Ct. 1972)). The case at bar involves specialized knowledge about the design of portable circular saws, which is outside the scope of a layperson's knowledge.

  8. Gunby v. Aldi, Inc.

    2018 Ill. App. 171289 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018)

    We thus affirm the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Aldi on the negligence count (count I) of the amended complaint. ¶ 39 Based on the foregoing, Herman's claim for loss of consortium must fail. Because his loss of consortium action derives from Patrinia's negligence action against Aldi, his recovery for loss of consortium is dependent upon the establishment of Aldi's liability for Patrinia's alleged injuries. E.g., Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Center of Round Lake No. 252c, 147 Ill. App. 3d 546, 555 (1986). Furthermore, to the extent that Herman has failed to advance any arguments on appeal regarding his loss of consortium claim, those arguments are forfeited.

  9. Salazar v. Giannotti

    2018 Ill. App. 171307 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018)

    a reasonable opinion to be asserted by an expert.' " Baley, 2012 IL App (1st) 093312, ¶ 76 (quoting Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Center of Round Lake No. 252c, 147 Ill. App. 3d 546, 562 (1986)). ¶ 19 Here, we find that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in barring Bryant from offering his causation opinions.

  10. Meyer v. Laidlaw Transit, Inc.

    2013 Ill. App. 121125 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013)

    Monroe v. Trinity Hospital-Advocate, 345 Ill. App. 3d 896, 899 (2003). His action is "dependent upon the establishment" of Laidlaw's liability for Sheree's injuries. Pease v. Ace Hardware Home Ctr. of Round Lake No. 252c, 147 Ill. App. 3d 546, 555 (1986). Since Laidlaw's liability for Sheree's injuries has not been established, Kenneth's derivative claim for loss of consortium must fail.